Color me as another unconvinced that the PC market is dead.
Sure, the action is in mobile devices, and particularly smartphones. But that hardly means the death of the PC, because of all the things you *can't* do on a smartphone.
For instance, I'm currently designing a publication for a non-profit's annual convention. I'm spending a fair bit of time in a DTP program, refining a design, working on a big monitor that will let me view two 8.5x11 pages side by side in almost full size. That simply isn't *possible* on a smartphone, or any other mobile device, because the form factor is all wrong.
And that's just one example. There are all too many things where you really need a big monitor, full size keyboard, and mouse, with a fast CPU, lots of RAM, and fairly high end graphics.
Lots of the things touted as people *doing* on a smartphone are things I would not use one for. Again, the issue is form factor. Most of what I do really needs a bigger screen *and* a proper keyboard - virtual keyboards and thumbboards are not adequate substitutes.
I grant that the PC market is unlikely to grow, and growth is in tablets and smartphones, but I can't call a market that will still sell millions of devices per year dead.
George and Junko, if you actually *believe* the PC market is dead, show the courage of your convictions. Turn off your PCs and do everything you do for EETimes from your smartphones/tablets. I bet you *can't*.

Color me as another unconvinced that the PC market is dead.
Sure, the action is in mobile devices, and particularly smartphones. But that hardly means the death of the PC, because of all the things you *can't* do on a smartphone.
For instance, I'm currently designing a publication for a non-profit's annual convention. I'm spending a fair bit of time in a DTP program, refining a design, working on a big monitor that will let me view two 8.5x11 pages side by side in almost full size. That simply isn't *possible* on a smartphone, or any other mobile device, because the form factor is all wrong.
And that's just one example. There are all too many things where you really need a big monitor, full size keyboard, and mouse, with a fast CPU, lots of RAM, and fairly high end graphics.
Lots of the things touted as people *doing* on a smartphone are things I would not use one for. Again, the issue is form factor. Most of what I do really needs a bigger screen *and* a proper keyboard - virtual keyboards and thumbboards are not adequate substitutes.
I grant that the PC market is unlikely to grow, and growth is in tablets and smartphones, but I can't call a market that will still sell millions of devices per year dead.
George and Junko, if you actually *believe* the PC market is dead, show the courage of your convictions. Turn off your PCs and do everything you do for EETimes from your smartphones/tablets. I bet you *can't*.

I'm not sure Intel's handling of Ottelini's resignation constitutes a tech blunder. We won't be able to make a call on that till they've picked a new CEO and he's been in office long enough for preliminary results to be evident.
Sure, good companies have a succession plan. But the fact that Intel didn't announce a successor to Ottelini doesn't mean they *don't* have one.
If Ottelini is capable, he's been grooming potential internal successors, and may have presented several possible candidates to Intel's board. He might also have mentioned possible candidates outside of Intel.
But who the next CEO is isn't his call - it's the board's. He announced his resignation 6 months out, but he's still in the ofice on the job - the resignation won't take effect for a while. He's given the board 6 months to consider who the new guy ought to be.
When he actually *does* leave Intel, if it *has* a functioning succession plan, the board will announce who his replacement will be. Then we'll find out how well they've done *their* main job, which is to *hire* the CEO.

I'm not sure Intel's handling of Ottelini's resignation constitutes a tech blunder. We won't be able to make a call on that till they've picked a new CEO and he's been in office long enough for preliminary results to be evident.
Sure, good companies have a succession plan. But the fact that Intel didn't announce a successor to Ottelini doesn't mean they *don't* have one.
If Ottelini is capable, he's been grooming potential internal successors, and may have presented several possible candidates to Intel's board. He might also have mentioned possible candidates outside of Intel.
But who the next CEO is isn't his call - it's the board's. He announced his resignation 6 months out, but he's still in the ofice on the job - the resignation won't take effect for a while. He's given the board 6 months to consider who the new guy ought to be.
When he actually *does* leave Intel, if it *has* a functioning succession plan, the board will announce who his replacement will be. Then we'll find out how well they've done *their* main job, which is to *hire* the CEO.

"A group of lithography experts estimates that commercialization of 14-nm chip fabrication could slip to 2014 or beyond unless powerful light sources of EUV can be perfected." (May I respectfully suggest you find new lithography "experts". These are the same dudes who estimated commercialization of EUV at 65nm so many, many years ago. Ask a marketing guy without an ax to grind)
"Meanwhile, Intel and the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. aren’t giving up. In October, they committed billions of dollars to the Dutch EUV developer ASML." (Of course they are giving up. Those billions are for 450mm wafer, enabling ASML to continue to save [everyone's] face on EUV while really focusing on 450).
"Holding up the promised delivery of EUV is the use of light sources nearly 20 times more powerful than those used today." (When is the last time you saw a 20X increase in 2 years....zzzzzzzzzz).
"But throughput remains 15 to 30 times too slow for Intel, Samsung and TSMC." (It really says 15-30X more expensive for something that was too expensive at 125WSPH anyway!)
"All this could mean that Moore’s Law might finally be running out of steam." (Where have I heard this before?)
This EUV is either (1) terrible or (2) the remaining EUV diehards are finally waving a white flag.

"A group of lithography experts estimates that commercialization of 14-nm chip fabrication could slip to 2014 or beyond unless powerful light sources of EUV can be perfected." (May I respectfully suggest you find new lithography "experts". These are the same dudes who estimated commercialization of EUV at 65nm so many, many years ago. Ask a marketing guy without an ax to grind)
"Meanwhile, Intel and the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. aren’t giving up. In October, they committed billions of dollars to the Dutch EUV developer ASML." (Of course they are giving up. Those billions are for 450mm wafer, enabling ASML to continue to save [everyone's] face on EUV while really focusing on 450).
"Holding up the promised delivery of EUV is the use of light sources nearly 20 times more powerful than those used today." (When is the last time you saw a 20X increase in 2 years....zzzzzzzzzz).
"But throughput remains 15 to 30 times too slow for Intel, Samsung and TSMC." (It really says 15-30X more expensive for something that was too expensive at 125WSPH anyway!)
"All this could mean that Moore’s Law might finally be running out of steam." (Where have I heard this before?)
This EUV is either (1) terrible or (2) the remaining EUV diehards are finally waving a white flag.